this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2024
272 points (96.9% liked)

World News

39019 readers
2070 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The United States last week secretly shipped a new long-range missile system to Ukraine, and Ukrainian forces immediately used the weapons to attack a Russian military airfield in Crimea last Wednesday and Russian troops in the country’s southeast overnight on Tuesday, according to a senior U.S. official.

The United States previously supplied Ukraine with a version of the Army Tactical Missile Systems — known as ATACMS — armed with wide-spreading cluster munitions that can travel 100 miles.

But Ukraine has long coveted the system’s longer-range version, with a range of about 190 miles. That can reach deeper into occupied Ukraine, including Crimea, a hub of Russian air and ground forces, and supply nodes for Moscow’s forces in the country’s southeast.

Overnight Tuesday, Ukraine used the longer-range missiles to strike Russian troops in the port city of Berdiansk on the Sea of Azov, the senior U.S. official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss operational matters.

MBFC
Archive

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] corroded@lemmy.world -3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

This is certainly good news, and I don't intend to detract from it.

That being said, my opinion as an American is that the kind of missiles we need to be sending to Ukraine are the nuclear kind. The Russian government has said that they will use nuclear weapons in the event that the existence of their country is threatened. Fine, I understand that. Ukraine needs to have the same leverage. The existence of their country as they know it is being threatened; it would certainly turn the tables for them to say "Yes, we have nuclear weapons, and we'll only use them if our continued existence is being threatened. By the way, you're threatening it; you should really stop."

[–] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 23 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

Hard disagree. Nuclear weapons are for deterring certain military actions, not ongoing ones. Giving Ukraine nukes just adds to the likely hood of a nuclear war. Currently the West is trying to show that countries without ~~bikes~~ nukes can still be protected if we all work together to protect a country's sovereignty

[–] CraigeryTheKid@lemm.ee 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

ukraine is out of bikes too?!

[–] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago

They willingly gave them all up with their nukes

[–] ours@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

And I think NATO is already deterring Russia from using nukes in Ukraine but claiming that it considers any nuclear attack there as an attack on Europe.

But yes, deterring a conventional conflict needs nuclear weapons before the conflict starts.

[–] sushibowl@feddit.nl 9 points 6 months ago

This will not work. Giving two countries who are actively at war nuclear weapons will result in them firing their nuclear weapons. That's not the result you want.

"Yes, we have nuclear weapons, and we'll only use them if our continued existence is being threatened. By the way, you're threatening it; you should really stop."

This threat is really weak, because the second sentence undermines the first. If they are already threatening your existence, why haven't you fired your nukes yet?